FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : GLANBIA CONSUMER FOODS - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. 1. Change from 40 to 39 hour working week. 2. Rostering of Day off. 3. Saturday Working
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between the Company and Union in relation to proposed changes to the number of hours worked per week, the rostering of days off and changes to Saturday working within the Company. The current practice in the Company is that workers work 40 hours per week but are paid for 39. The additional hour per week is banked and taken as leave subject to a maximum of six days per year. In addition workers have a fixed day off per week and every third Saturday is a day off. Management are seeking to reduce the working week to 39 hours, have a floating day off that can be changed with two weeks notice and for the worker's to have one Saturday off every four weeks as opposed to one every three weeks. The Company's position is that it requires the change to reduced costs and match labour availability with operational needs. The Union's position is that the conditions currently in operation are the subject of agreement between the parties and should not be changed without agreement.
The dispute was not resolved at local level and was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached the matter was referred to the Labour Court on 18th May, 2011 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 11th August, 2011
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The current working pattern forms part of an agreement concluded between the parties and should not be unilaterally changed by management. The workers value the option to accrue additional leave through working an additional hour per week as it greatly assists with their work life balance and fulfilling other responsibilities.
2 The practice of having set rostered days off and every third Saturdayoff gives certainty to the workers in organising their personal lives. The workers have always been proactive in working with management as difficulties arise and are of the view that further discussion could lead to adequate efficiencies and savings without the need to implement the proposed changes.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The Company is experiencing serious trading difficulties and needs to implement these changes in order to remain competitive and protect employment into the future.
2 The changes required will result in a more efficient method of staff deployment within the Company and the rostering changes will lead to significant savings as a reduced number of casual employees will be needed going forward.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Company sought to reduce its cost base by making some changes to the hours of work and rostered days off. It submitted to the Court that these changes were critical in order to improve the operational efficiency of its Fonthill site. There were three issues referred to the Court, as follows:
- Change from working 40 hours per week to work 39 hours per week and eliminate six days leave/48 banked hours which had been granted in lieu.
- Change from having one Saturday off in three to having one Saturday off in four
- Change from having a rotational day off each week to having a designated day off as decided by the Company by the giving of two weeks notice.
The Union were opposed to the changes sought, however, it did indicate its willingness to discuss cost saving measures for the Company.
Having considered the submissions of both parties the Court recommends that the parties should enter into serious discussion on agreeing how the changes required by the Company can be achieved in order to meet the Company’s required cost base. The Court recommends that included in these discussions should be an agreement on reasonably compensating employees for concession made.
The Court recommends that this process should be completed by no later than four weeks from the date of this Recommendation.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
25th August 2011______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.